PortfoliosLab logoPortfoliosLab logo
ABOT vs. SCHG
Performance
Return for Risk
Drawdowns
Volatility
Dividends

Performance

ABOT vs. SCHG - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Abacus FCF Innovation Leaders ETF (ABOT) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Loading charts...

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, ABOT achieves a 4.07% return, which is significantly lower than SCHG's 6.40% return.


ABOT

1D
0.30%
1M
6.30%
6M
7.71%
YTD
4.07%
1Y
6.56%
3Y*
16.39%
5Y*
9.11%
10Y*

SCHG

1D
-0.77%
1M
2.08%
6M
6.99%
YTD
6.40%
1Y
17.60%
3Y*
21.98%
5Y*
13.84%
10Y*
18.48%
*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

ABOT vs. SCHG - Yearly Performance Comparison


2026 (YTD)202520242023202220212020
ABOT
Abacus FCF Innovation Leaders ETF
4.07%8.42%31.93%26.92%-24.05%18.51%3.29%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
6.40%17.50%34.95%50.10%-31.80%28.11%2.52%

Correlation

The correlation between ABOT and SCHG is 0.73, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.


Correlation
Correlation (1Y)
Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

0.73

Correlation (3Y)
Calculated over the trailing 3-year period

0.84

Correlation (5Y)
Calculated over the trailing 5-year period

0.87

Correlation (All Time)
Calculated using the full available price history since Dec 8, 2020

0.87

The correlation between ABOT and SCHG shifts across timeframes, from 0.73 (1 year) to 0.87 (5 years), reflecting how their relationship changes across market environments.

Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs

Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.


Return for Risk

ABOT vs. SCHG — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

ABOT
ABOT Risk / Return Rank: 1515
Overall Rank
ABOT Sharpe Ratio Rank: 1616
Sharpe Ratio Rank
ABOT Sortino Ratio Rank: 1515
Sortino Ratio Rank
ABOT Omega Ratio Rank: 1515
Omega Ratio Rank
ABOT Calmar Ratio Rank: 1414
Calmar Ratio Rank
ABOT Martin Ratio Rank: 1313
Martin Ratio Rank

SCHG
SCHG Risk / Return Rank: 3232
Overall Rank
SCHG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3636
Sharpe Ratio Rank
SCHG Sortino Ratio Rank: 3434
Sortino Ratio Rank
SCHG Omega Ratio Rank: 3434
Omega Ratio Rank
SCHG Calmar Ratio Rank: 2626
Calmar Ratio Rank
SCHG Martin Ratio Rank: 3030
Martin Ratio Rank
The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

ABOT vs. SCHG - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Abacus FCF Innovation Leaders ETF (ABOT) and Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.


ABOTSCHGDifference
Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility

-0.72

Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk

-0.92

Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability

1.07

1.19

-0.12

Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown

0.31

1.08

-0.77

Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown

0.71

3.45

-2.74

ABOT vs. SCHG - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current ABOT Sharpe Ratio is 0.36, which is lower than the SCHG Sharpe Ratio of 1.08. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of ABOT and SCHG, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.


Loading charts...

Drawdowns

ABOT vs. SCHG - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum ABOT drawdown since its inception was -29.71%, smaller than the maximum SCHG drawdown of -34.59%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for ABOT and SCHG.


Loading charts...

Drawdown Indicators


ABOTSCHGDifference

Max Drawdown

Largest peak-to-trough decline

-29.71%

-34.59%

+4.88%

Max Drawdown (1Y)

Largest decline over 1 year

-21.54%

-16.41%

-5.13%

Max Drawdown (3Y)

Largest decline over 3 years

-22.72%

-23.39%

+0.67%

Max Drawdown (5Y)

Largest decline over 5 years

-29.71%

-34.59%

+4.88%

Max Drawdown (10Y)

Largest decline over 10 years

-34.59%

Current Drawdown

Current decline from peak

-2.91%

-1.80%

-1.11%

Average Drawdown

Average peak-to-trough decline

-9.41%

-5.19%

-4.22%

Ulcer Index

Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks

9.24%

5.11%

+4.13%

Volatility

ABOT vs. SCHG - Volatility Comparison

Abacus FCF Innovation Leaders ETF (ABOT) has a higher volatility of 5.55% compared to Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF (SCHG) at 4.61%. This indicates that ABOT's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than SCHG based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.


Loading charts...

Volatility by Period


ABOTSCHGDifference

Volatility (1M)

Calculated over the trailing 1-month period

5.55%

4.61%

+0.94%

Volatility (6M)

Calculated over the trailing 6-month period

15.72%

12.80%

+2.92%

Volatility (1Y)

Calculated over the trailing 1-year period

18.44%

16.35%

+2.09%

Volatility (5Y)

Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized

19.83%

22.41%

-2.58%

Volatility (10Y)

Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized

19.72%

21.56%

-1.84%

ABOT vs. SCHG - Expense Ratio Comparison

ABOT has a 0.39% expense ratio, which is higher than SCHG's 0.04% expense ratio.


Dividends

ABOT vs. SCHG - Dividend Comparison

ABOT's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.33%, less than SCHG's 0.38% yield.


PositionTTM20252024202320222021202020192018201720162015
ABOT
Abacus FCF Innovation Leaders ETF
0.33%0.38%1.28%0.77%1.20%4.77%0.02%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%0.00%
SCHG
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
0.38%0.36%0.39%0.46%0.55%0.42%0.52%0.82%1.27%1.01%1.04%1.22%

Frequently Asked Questions


ABOT and SCHG have a correlation of 0.73, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

ABOT has higher volatility (5.55%) compared to SCHG (4.61%). In terms of maximum drawdown, ABOT dropped -29.71% vs SCHG's -34.59%.

On 5-year performance, SCHG leads with 13.84% vs 9.11% for ABOT. On fees, SCHG is cheaper at 0.04% per year. On volatility, SCHG has been the lower-risk option at 4.61%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Over the 5-year period, SCHG has performed better with a 13.84% return vs 9.11%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

SCHG is cheaper with a 0.04% expense ratio, compared with 0.39% for ABOT.

SCHG has the higher dividend yield at 0.38%, compared with 0.33% for ABOT.

ABOT tracks FCF US Quality Innovation Index, while SCHG tracks Dow Jones U.S. Large-Cap Growth Total Stock Market Index. They also come from different issuers: Abacus and Charles Schwab. Their fees differ too: 0.39% for ABOT and 0.04% for SCHG.

SCHG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.08 vs 0.36), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.

Portfolio Optimizer

Find the right allocation for ABOT and SCHG

Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.

Open Portfolio Optimizer